Safety of percutaneous dilatational tracheotomy (PDT) with the rigid tracheotomy endoscope (TED): a 6-month follow-up multicenter investigation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The rigid tracheotomy endoscope (TED) was recently introduced to improve the fiberoptic technique during percutaneous dilatational tracheotomy (PDT) in critically ill patients. The aim was to evaluate the long-term complications of PDT using TED equipment in a prospective multicenter investigation. METHODS: One hundred eighty adult patients underwent PDT using TED in four German hospitals. Patients who were alive or their guardians were contacted via telephone and interviewed using a structured questionnaire 6 months following the tracheostomy procedure. Patients with airway complaints were invited for outpatient clinical ENT examination. The incidence of adverse events related to PDT was registered. RESULTS: Of 180 patients who received tracheostomy, 137 (76.1%) were alive at the time of follow-up. None of the 43 lethal events was related to the PDT. Fifty-three (38.7%) patients were available for follow-up examination, whereas 14 (10.2%) were able to visit ENT physicians. Two (3.8%) out of 53 patients developed tracheocutaneous fistula with required surgical closure of tracheostoma. Dyspnea (7.5%), hoarseness (5.7%), stridor and swallowing difficulties (both with 3.8%) were the most common complaints. Tracheal stenosis was confirmed in 1 patient (1.88% [95% CI: 0.33; 9.93]). CONCLUSION: The use of TED for PDT in the clinical setting is safe regarding adverse events at 6-month follow-up. The incidence of tracheal stenosis after PDT with TED is comparable with that of flexible bronchoscopy; however, its role for PDT at the intensive care unit should be clarified in further investigations.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".